Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Citation
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Parent Document
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Jurisdiction
- Missouri (state)
- Effective Date
- 1992-12-15
- Original Source
- https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2429801/ladeas-v-carter/ ↗
Other Sections in This Document (82)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
- Ladeas v. Carter, 845 S.W.2d 45 (1992)
Full Text
745 charsThe defendants’ argument refers to Missouri Supreme Court Rule 37.34 which mandates that all violations shall be “prosecuted” by information and allows the prosecutor to file an information based upon either his own knowledge or information and belief or upon a verified complaint. Rule 37.33 requires the written complaint, among other things, to be verified by oath or affirmation of the complainant. Defendant Carters argue that since the trial complaint and summons were not verified by the oath or the affirmation of anyone, let alone Mrs. Carter, or signed by the prosecutor, it was ineffective as an information. The complaint bears the handwritten notation “Dismissed rent problem Jim Riner.” Relying on Supreme Court Rule 37.33, the *49